Materialism is based on physics.
Er, no. How can you possibly base materialism (a metaphysical position) on physics? Materialism is (usually) an assumption of physics (some, though not many, physicists assume dualism instead). If you try to use physics to argue for materialism you have a circular argument; the most you can claim from that is that materialism and physics are consistent with each other. Which of course they are, that doesn't make materialism the only metaphysical position consistent with physics.
Dualism is based on nothing, true, but the same can be said for materialism and idealism. You've stepped outside science and into metaphysics, in just the way I described.
Now, it is possible to reason about metaphysics, but trying to argue from science ("based on nothing"), ad-hominem attacks ("don't know shit about "mind" beyond their baseless dogma and refuse to learn about brains") and handwaving ("woo") doesn't make for a coherent case.
Try reading "Aping Humanity" by Raymond Tallis -- prominent atheist, neuroscientist and philosopher -- and you might learn that things are more complex than you think. Assuming you're willing to move beyond baseless dogma, that is.
Lawmakers in Britain don't have to do anything, as Uber is already able and does comply with all licensing requirements.
That's in dispute. It hinges on whether the app that Uber divers use to calculate the fare constitutes a taximeter or not. Uber (and Transport for London) say it doesn't because there's no physical connection required with the vehicle, whereas the black cab and minicab drivers say it does because it's a device that calculates the fare based on measured distance travelled. The case has yet to come to court, and until it does nobody really knows whether it's legal or not (personally I suspect it isn't, but IANAL).
Further, the most dangerous cities to live in today, are precisely those cities with the strictest gun control.
I'd like to see that evidence. Worldwide, that is, not just the USA.
And the time series of gun control and violence -- after all, it couldn't be that the gun control is a response to the violence, could it?
And even where there is nominal 4G coverage, it's patchy. I live in London, which is supposed to be pretty well covered by 4G, but much of the time I can't get it.
On the other hand, 3G should be fine in Scotland. Sure, a lot of Scotland has no cellphone signal at all, but that's because a lot of Scotland is wilderness. If the OP's daughter is actually studying in a town, the mobile signal should be fine. And there will be plenty of free WiFi hotspots - coffee shops, bars & McDonalds - if she wants to voip home to ask for money.